Reflective thoughts on Logic and Buddhism

Buddhism and Logic:

There are two types of logic systems used on Earth, the either-or logic system used mainly in the west and the both-and logic system used mainly in the east. There is a law of logic called the Law of Non-Contradiction, which states that "A can not be both A and not A at the same time, in the same place and in the same way." For example, you cannot be both wearing shoes and not wearing shoes at the same time, in the same place, and in the same way.

There is another Law known as the Law of the Excluded middle which states, something is either A or not A. This is what some people call either-or logic. Regardless, when one of these laws is broken we call it a contradiction. I have heard many spiritualist and Buddhist say that one must abandon the idea of either/or because reality itself contains contradictions, and believe that things can be both this and that at the same time in the same place in the same way. Do you see the fallacy? They are telling people they must use either Both and Logic or nothing else.

This way of thinking says that one must use either/or logic to choose a world view, but that type of logic is not sufficient for knowledge of the Ultimate Reality.

This way of thinking says that one must use either/or logic to choose a world view, but that type of logic is not sufficient for knowledge of the Ultimate Reality.

This is the part where we make up a bunch of "rules" (emphasis on the quotes) for this "Ultimate Reality" (again, emphasis on the quotes) which just to happen to fit quite neatly with exactly what we want this "Ultimate Reality" to do for us.

It's almost like this "Ultimate Reality" was tailored specifically for our self-centered sense of fulfillment.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Okay, so....
and then? What do you think about it?

Given your post history, I'm thinking you will be ridiculing the "both-and" (Oriental) method of thought and perception and claim that the western (Occidental) "either (Christian)-or-(doomed)" method is correct. Maybe not, though. Hence my response. What is your position?

I agree that either/or does not work, if that's what you meant to say.
I DISAGREE that only Christianity is correct.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Okay, so....
and then? What do you think about it?

Given your post history, I'm thinking you will be ridiculing the "both-and" (Oriental) method of thought and perception and claim that the western (Occidental) "either (Christian)-or-(doomed)" method is correct. Maybe not, though. Hence my response. What is your position?

I agree that either/or does not work, if that's what you meant to say.
I DISAGREE that only Christianity is correct.

Well to say either or doesn't work means your using either or to make that statement

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

Do you see the fallacy? They are telling people they must use either Both and Logic or nothing else.

It's tricky stuff, but I think there's a chance that you're being deliberately obtuse in order to maintain your 'either you're Christian like me, or your religion is wrong' posture. With all due respect.

Use both either or and both and to transcend words, concepts, culture, and religion itself.

a reply to: BlueMule

It's funny that so many people immediately react to the fact that I am a Christian, and ignore the point which is strictly about logic. I mentioned Buddhism because that is we're you will find that style if thinking. Both and logic is self defeating and I have shown why.

originally posted by: BlueMule

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

Do you see the fallacy? They are telling people they must use either Both and Logic or nothing else.

It's tricky stuff, but I think there's a chance that you're being deliberately obtuse in order to maintain your 'either you're Christian like me, or your religion is wrong' posture. With all due respect.

Use both either or and both and to transcend words, concepts, culture, and religion itself.

Once again here you are trying to use both and logic and it is completely contradictory in most cases. For example, you said use either or and both and logic. If you are using one you cannot use the other. It's a contradictory statement in itself.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

I have heard many spiritualist and Buddhist say that one must abandon the idea of either/or because reality itself contains contradictions, and believe that things can be both this and that at the same time in the same place in the same way.

Yes. I agree with this.

Do you see the fallacy?

No. I do you see how there could be confusion though. It's esoteric.

They are telling people they must use either Both and Logic or nothing else.

I've read this, like.....10 times and I still don't know what you're trying to say.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: BlueMule

It's funny that so many people immediately react to the fact that I am a Christian, and ignore the point which is strictly about logic. I mentioned Buddhism because that is we're you will find that style if thinking. Both and logic is self defeating and I have shown why.

Just to give a better example of why you cannot use both logic systems at once, you cannot look at a situation and say either I am sitting down or standing up an then turn around and say I am both sitting down and standing up at the same time same place and same way. The second statement is completely illogical when looking at reality.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Was Jesus both fully human and fully God at the same time? Is The Trinity three individual entities and one entity at the same time? Are we both eternal spiritual beings and temporal mortal bodies?

Can we be both dead and alive at the same time?

Christianity says "Yes" to all of the above.

a reply to: windword

If you agree with the statement that things can be both this and that at the same time and place and the same way . That means you are saying I either use "both and" logic or nothing else to describe reality is that right?

The fallacy is right in front of you. To say the statement above you use " either or" logic.....it's is self defeating. Oh it's esoteric? So I have to be enlightened to understand why one must think that way? Lol is that not what many religions say about their god or god? Mormonism is esoteric according to its followers does that make it true?

I don't know how to say the last quote any clearer. When Buddhist or spiritualist or anyone says that in order to understand something the correct way you must use "both and" logic . So what they are doing is using "either or" logic to say one must use "both and" logic. How? You must use EITHER " both and" logic OR nothing else. The either or is always there even with that style of thinking.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

If you agree with the statement that things can be both this and that at the same time and place and the same way . That means you are saying I either use "both and" logic or nothing else to describe reality is that right?

No. Of course not.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Was Jesus both fully human and fully God at the same time? Is The Trinity three individual entities and one entity at the same time? Are we both eternal spiritual beings and temporal mortal bodies?

Can we be both dead and alive at the same time?

Christianity says "Yes" to all of the above.

Jesus is the visible image of God. Can we be both alive and dead at the same time in the same place in the same way ? No. One is either alive on earth or dead on earth even in Christianity. Does god appear as Spirit god and in the form of Jesus in the same time same place and same way? No god is either visible or invisible. Are we eternal and mortal? No. Either death is the end or it is not.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Well to say either or doesn't work means your using either or to make that statement

What? No....nono....I said that I didn't understand what point you are trying to make.
And I asked if you were alluding/referring/adhering to or suggesting "either(Christian)/or(doomed)" thinking. Apparently you were, even though you didn't answer my question.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: BlueMule

It's funny that so many people immediately react to the fact that I am a Christian, and ignore the point which is strictly about logic.

Thats ok, I'm not offended by your religion. I'm offended by your logic. :p

Seriously though, the esoteric mystical literature of your own religion makes no sense using your logic. Therefore I conclude you are an exoteric orthodox fundamentalist.

To each their own. But I disaprove, because Jesus was a mystic who defied your simplistic logic.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

It's not either your Christian or doomed . The correct way to state it would be either your Christian or your not Christian . You cannot be both a Christian and not a Christian. Like I said my point is both and logic uses either or logic to say that you must use both and logic

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Jesus is the visible image of God.

Really? Can you see Jesus? Either you can or you can't.

Can we be both alive and dead at the same time in the same place in the same way ? No. One is either alive on earth or dead on earth even in Christianity.

Are we eternal and mortal? No. Either death is the end or it is not.

Amen, amen I say unto you: He that believeth in me, hath everlasting life.
48 I am the bread of life.
49 Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead.
50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die.

Your turn.

originally posted by: BlueMule

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: BlueMule

It's funny that so many people immediately react to the fact that I am a Christian, and ignore the point which is strictly about logic.

Thats ok, I'm not offended by your religion. I'm offended by your logic. :p

Seriously though, the esoteric mystical literature of your own religion makes no sense using your logic. Therefore I conclude you are an exoteric orthodox fundamentalist.

To each their own. But I disaprove, because Jesus was a mystic who defied your simplistic logic.

We'll I'm glad you know more about what I believe than I do myself. My religion makes perfect sense with either or logic but nice try

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

The correct way to state it would be either your Christian or your not Christian . You cannot be both a Christian and not a Christian.

Well, yeah, actually, you can.

I believe the lessons Jesus taught were important and invaluable to humanity at large. Great guy, important ideas. So, I'm a "Christian" in that regard.

I do NOT, however, believe that he was raised from the dead (or even that he died on the cross! and I'm not even sure if he existed at all!) or that he was born of a 'virgin'.

so - what about my stance makes me either/or Christian? Can I not believe in his teachings without buying the mythology attached to it?

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

We'll I'm glad you know more about what I believe than I do myself. My religion makes perfect sense with either or logic but nice try

I'll have to respectfully disagree. Your religion only makes 'sense' in light of non-dualism.

But either/or logic can't accomodate non-dualism. It can only accomodate dualism and naive realism.

"Western Judeo-Christians are often uncomfortable with the word "nonduality." They often associate it (negatively) with Eastern religions. I am convinced, however, that Jesus was the first nondual religious teacher of the West, and one reason we have failed to understand so much of his teaching, much less follow it, is because we tried to understand it with a dualistic mind."

~ by Fr. Richard Rohr, in The Naked Now: Learning to See as the Mystics See